An investigation by The Indian Express has uncovered repeated internal differences within the three-member Election Commission of India (ECI), with Election Commissioners Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi raising at least 14 written objections over a 10-month period to decisions and orders concerning electoral rolls and the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR).

The investigation, led by journalist Ritika Chopra, found that the two Election Commissioners objected to several decisions which they said had been taken or implemented without their knowledge: including new additions, deletions, and restorations of names in electoral rolls, appeals regarding the revision process or the access to the Election Commission’s electoral-roll database.

The findings come in the backdrop of the nationwide expansion of the SIR exercise, which began in Bihar in June 2025 and has so far been extended to 30 States and Union Territories. According to The Indian Express, more than 13 crore names were struck off draft electoral rolls during the exercise, placing the process of voter registration and deletions under a heightened public scrutiny.

One area of disagreement was the Form 6, which is used by citizens to register as new voters. The investigation reported that the form was altered to include questions linking new voter applications to electoral rolls from the previous SIR. Joshi had reportedly questioned the legal basis of changing the statutory form, while Sandhu later described the change as being “unauthorised and illegal.”

The two Commissioners also raised concerns over the centralisation of electoral-roll technology and database access. In separate letters, they approached Cabinet Secretary T V Somanathan over changes in the allocation of administrative responsibilities involving the Election Commission’s information-technology infrastructure. The Indian Express, however, reported that the Commissioners argued that some changes had been made without their knowledge and reduced the existing supervisory control.

The investigation also reported concern over the functioning of the electoral-roll software, and specific cases of voter records. Among the issues examined were applications and appeals in West Bengal, and the omission of 97 voters from a final electoral roll in Goa despite their eligibility, the report claimed.

The developments have raised concerns over the extent of collective oversight within the constitutional poll body, but the disagreements do not by themselves establish that the Commission’s final decisions were invalid or that the institution was incapable of functioning.

The Election Commission has dismissed the characterisation of the internal differences as an institutional breakdown, saying that written notes, observations and technical suggestions are a part of the normal deliberative process within a multi-member constitutional body. It has maintained that its decisions were taken through the prescribed institutional process and that the final decisions of the Commission were unanimous.

The controversy therefore revolves both around the individual objections and, more pointedly, on how the Commission records, resolves and communicates differences among its members while overseeing one of the country’s largest electoral-roll revision exercises.

The Indian Express said it approached questions to the Election Commission and sought replies from the two Election Commissioners before publication. According to the report, no reply was received to those queries at the time of publishing.